, Volume 23, Issue 11, pp 1569-1576
Date: 28 Apr 2012

Magnetic resonance imaging of abdominal versus vaginal prolapse surgery with mesh

Rent the article at a discount

Rent now

* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.

Get Access

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

We compared two surgical approaches in patients with symptomatic prolapse of the vaginal apex with normal controls by analyzing pelvic landmark relationships measured using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before and after surgery.

Methods

In this prospective multicenter pilot study involving 16 participants, nulliparous controls (n = 6) were compared with ten parous (3.0 ± 1.0) women with uterine apical prolapse equal to or greater than stage 2. Group A (n = 5) underwent abdominal sacral colpopexy with monofilament polypropylene mesh and group B (n = 5) with vaginal mesh kit repair (Total ProLift). Subtotal hysterectomy was performed in all group A and no group B women. All patients underwent preoperative and 3-month postoperative Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) and dynamic MRI. Comparison of MRI pelvic angles and distances was performed and analyzed by Mann–Whitney rank sum test and chi-square test.

Results

Vaginal apical support is similar at 3 months for abdominal sacral colpopexy (ASCP) and ProLift by POP-Q examination and MRI analysis. In both treatment groups, the postoperative POP-Q point C and MRI parameters were similar to nulliparous controls at 3 months.

Conclusions

Anatomic outcomes for ASCP compared with ProLift were similar at 3 months in terms of vaginal apical support by POP-Q and MRI analysis. Continued comparative analysis of postoperative support with objective imaging seems warranted.